Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

A place for those new to Biblical Hebrew to ask basic questions about the language of the Hebrew Bible.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
ducky
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by ducky »

Hi Glenn and Steve

Steve, the word צר in this context doesn't mean an Enemy in the regular meaning (as an enemy who wants to kill you), but it is like someone that stands in the same place as yours.

I wrote in my first post here to check this word in the beginning of this book, and I don't know if you understood what I meant.
Peninah and Hanna were the two wives of Elkana, and Peninah was called as צרה to Hannah
(and vice versa).
When there are two persons that "stands in the same place", each one is called צר for the other.

So such as a wife is צרה to the other wife, so is a family of priests is צר for the other family of priests.

There were two families, one from the seed of Itamar, and one from the seed of Elazar (both sons of Aharon).

Eli and his family were from the seed of Itamar, and they served at the temple.
After this curse to Eli, (and I wrote above that it is actually for his family, so it would not be fulfilled immediately) his family kept serving at the temple.
And this curse/prophecy was fulfilled at the time of Solomon, when he removed Evyatar (from Eli's family) from serving as the priest, and put Tsadoq instead (from the family of Elazar)

And it is said in 1Kings 2:27
[KJV]: So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord; that he might fulfil the word of the Lord, which he spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.

*************************************************
As for Hiphil
No need to explain any Hiphil as causative since not every Hiphil is really causative.
Sometimes the Hiphil actually refers to the subject itself (and no need to find a complicated explanation to push it to be causative).

****
Edit:
Also, see verse 35 that explains this prophecy
[KJV]: And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do according to that which is in mine heart and in my mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine anointed for ever.
David Hunter
Glenn Dean
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue May 26, 2020 6:28 pm

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by Glenn Dean »

Thanxs Ducky for that explanation!

Earlier I had tried to search for the word צרה (at alhatorah) but it didn't list any occurrences of that word in the early part of 1 Sam. BUT now I see it in verse 1:6 (but it's in construct so the Hey ==> Taw, which is why alhatorah didn't list it)

Glenn
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by SteveMiller »

Hi David,
Thanks for the explanation.
That is how I understood you.

Can you show me a verse where tsar means someone who takes your place?
In the case of Elkanah's 2 wives, Peninah was a real adversary to Hannah, tormenting her.

I understood v35 to refer to Samuel.

Regarding the hiphil, Jason's answer was very helpful to me.
The hiphil is causative relative to the qal.
In verbs such as nabat, used here, where the verb has no qal form, there is nothing to be causative in relation to.
When a hiphil verb has a qal form, it normally should be causative. There are probably exceptions.
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
ducky
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by ducky »

Hi Steve,

There is no other verse in the bible for me to show you but I'll tell you this.
Peninah indeed tormented Hannah, but that is not the main reason that she was called צרה.
the title צרתה comes as an objective title (saying that צרתה (her צרה) tormented her)
and so the צרה is צרה even if she didn't torment her.

the reason that the other wife is called צרה is not because of a specific act that one does but it is from the reason that when there are two wives, they are rivals by default.
(we can see it nicely in the wives of Jacob that were competing about bringing his children).
and each wife by default sees the other wife as her rival even if they get along.
(we can see it even today in the traditional Arabic culture).

There is a verse from Ben Sirah which says that a man should not talk with his wife about her צרתה (the other wife) - as do not put himself in the middle of them.

So I said that this word comes as an "objective" title, but of course, it would appear when there is a real rivalry.

Also, think about the word צר - narrow
which brings the idea of two persons stand in one place, and there is only room for one.

****************************************
About the prophecy itself...
I wrote in my last post the verse that talks about this prophecy, and so, there is no doubt that it didn't talk about Samuel but talks about the other family of priests.

I put it again:
1Kings 2:27
[KJV]: So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord; that he might fulfil the word of the Lord, which he spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.

****************************************
About Samuel...
Samuel wasn't a priest, and also not from the seed of Aharon.
he was serving Eli and at the "temple" as a Levi.

his dynasty (family tree) is written in 1Ch 6:7-13, 18:23

Also, notice that he put his sons as Judges after him and not as priest (since he wasn't a priest also).

****************************************
About the Hiphil...
I don't think it is easy to find the "rule"
Qal has two meanings (action and stative) - and I guess that the Hiphil (originally) came at first to complete the stative one (that is what my logic tells me) - but since thee was too much evolution in that matter already before the biblical era, it is hard not to find a lot of exceptions to break that so-called "rule".
David Hunter
User avatar
Jason Hare
Posts: 1920
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:07 am
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by Jason Hare »

Kirk Lowery wrote:Just a footnote to Jason's explanation: when the stem interacts with the meaning of the root, we can translate very literally, such as "he caused to come/enter". But at least in the case of English, we include the causative idea in the lexical form of a word. So in idiomatic English, a "proper" translation would be "he brought", with the causative idea combined with the idea of "movement toward". Sometimes there is no combined English word, so we're forced to use "cause to" in some cases.
Precisely!
Jason Hare
Tel Aviv, Israel
The Hebrew Café
יוֹדֵ֣עַ צַ֭דִּיק נֶ֣פֶשׁ בְּהֶמְתּ֑וֹ וְֽרַחֲמֵ֥י רְ֝שָׁעִ֗ים אַכְזָרִֽי׃
ספר משלי י״ב, י׳
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by SteveMiller »

ducky wrote:Hi Steve,

About the prophecy itself...
I wrote in my last post the verse that talks about this prophecy, and so, there is no doubt that it didn't talk about Samuel but talks about the other family of priests.

I put it again:
1Kings 2:27
[KJV]: So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord; that he might fulfil the word of the Lord, which he spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.
Thanks David! That does settle it. So you are right. 1Sa 2:35-36 has to refer to Zadok and his descendants.
I wonder if 1Sam 2:35 could be a double prophecy, partly fulfilled by Samuel, but ultimately by Zadok and his descendants.
Levites are also cohens, and only a cohen could offer sacrifices.
****************************************
ducky wrote:About Samuel...
Samuel wasn't a priest, and also not from the seed of Aharon.
he was serving Eli and at the "temple" as a Levi.

his dynasty (family tree) is written in 1Ch 6:7-13, 18:23

Also, notice that he put his sons as Judges after him and not as priest (since he wasn't a priest also).
I don't see anything about Samuel in those verses. Do you mean 1Ch 6:16-38?

Thanks, David. That was very good.
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
ducky
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by ducky »

Hi Steve,
Thank you too.

Verse 2:35 talks about a priest and his House, that will walk with the king.
So the attitude is about a priest.
It talks about the House of Tsadok which already at the time of David this started to be, and completed at Solomon days.

Remember that the sons of Samuel were not righteous.
(And also, this verse comes right after the talk about the death of Eli's sons which were priests).

******
Levi and Cohen are indeed from the same tribe, but not from the same families.
There are different, about many things in their roles, and there is nothing in the books that indicates that Samuel served as a priest.
And also, as you saw it yourself, Samuel is not from the family of priests.
(I meant the verses that I wrote. along with your verses).

*****
Just a note...
The word כהן=Cohen means in the bible commonly as a priest for God. But the basic meaning is like a servant, and so, the word appears also (rarely) in the meaning of just a servant for the King.
But in this case, it talks about the regular meaning of priests.
David Hunter
User avatar
Andrew Chapman
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 1:19 pm
Location: Oxford, England
Contact:

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by Andrew Chapman »

וְהִבַּטְתָּ֙ צַ֣ר מָע֔וֹן בְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יֵיטִ֖יב אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְלֹֽא־יִהְיֶ֥ה זָקֵ֛ן בְּבֵיתְךָ֖ כָּל־הַיָּמִֽים

Delitzsch: 'And thou wilt see oppression of the dwelling in all that He has shown of good to Israel' https://archive.org/details/cu319240522 ... 3/mode/2up

This seems to give a more natural sense for בְּ than the following, though admittedly 'despite' does seem to be possible (BDB III.7).

You will see the distress of My dwelling, in spite of all the good that [He] does for Israel; and an old man will not be in your house forever. [as NASB]
Andrew Chapman
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by Isaac Fried »

Seems to me that מָע֔וֹן = מה-עוֹן is here עוֹנִי, 'poverty', (see Job 36:15). So:
וְהִבַּטְתָּ֙ צַ֣ר מָע֔וֹן בְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר יֵיטִ֖יב אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל
"and you shall stare into want and poverty among all the plenty that He will show good to Israel"

Isaac Fried, Boston University
kwrandolph
Posts: 1531
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Help translating 1 Sam 2:32

Post by kwrandolph »

My 2¢ after all the other discussion.

The Hiphil and Hophal always have the causative force. However, translation is not evidence for what’s in the original language. In many cases, an idiomatic translation uses vocabulary other than the words used in Hebrew, words that bring out the causative meaning without using the phrase “cause to”.

[right]והבטת צר מעון בכל אשר ייטיב את ישראל…[/right]

You’ll be caused to stare at distressing of the dwelling, all that should cause to please Israel…

The Hophal הבטת has the passive causative with an active verb. The Hophal is used in three causative situations—passive causative with active verb as here, active causative with passive verb, and passive causative with passive verb. Context can usually tell us which situation is meant.

The word צר here has the meaning of “distress” for when Eli’s two sons snatched the Ark of the Covenant out of its rightful place in the Tabernacle to bring it to the encampment, it was a distress to Eli. The reason he was sitting at the gate of the town was because he was staring down the way, hoping for the return of the Ark of the Covenant.

The verb ייטיב is Hiphil, also Yiqtol. As a Yiqtol, it brings out the subjunctive mood “should cause to please”.

I hope this helps. Or should I be prepared to dodge rotten tomatoes lest they impact my face?

Karl W. Randolph.
Post Reply